The Ford Transit Custom isn't the only van gaining a space-maximizing inflatable pop-up roof design – the Volkswagen Transporter T7 gets one, too. Fast-growing German RV brand Rhön Camp presents the first Volkswagen camper van featuring a Freescape inflatable roof, pairing the rooftop air tent with a more permanent California-style interior. It reckons this one the "Ultimate" in Volkswagen van life.

Continue Reading

Category: Campervans, Adventure Vehicles, Outdoors

Tags: Campervan, Volkswagen, Inflatable, cmt-2026, Camping, Outdoors and Camping, RV

When it comes to tiny houses, the dimensions are so challenging that any way of expanding living space is a major bonus. The Park embraces this idea by offering a flexible and well-designed interior that's topped by a rooftop terrace area.

Continue Reading

Category: Tiny Houses, Outdoors

Tags: Building and Construction, Micro-House, Tiny Footprint, House, Home

It's become increasingly common for cameras to be able to capture Raw video without the need for an external recorder, making it that bit more accessible.

Photo: Mitchell Clark

Raw video looks set to become increasingly common on cameras, with cameras from Panasonic, Canon and Nikon all offering internal Raw capture options. We thought it was a good time to take another look at the pros and cons of Raw video, whether it's worth the effort and whether you should consider it an essential feature, next time you buy a camera.

The first point worth reiterating is that the benefits of Raw shooting aren't anywhere near as significant as they are for stills shooting. The main reason for this is that the alternative to shooting Raw stills is typically an 8-bit JPEG with a high-contrast S-curve applied to it, ready for viewing which leaves relatively little scope for significant brightness and tonal edits. Whereas the alternative to Raw in video tends to be 10-bit footage encoded with a Log response curve which is specifically designed to maintain tonal flexibility.

It also tends to be the case that most video is derived from 12-bit sensor readout, rather than the 14-bit modes used on most large pixel cameras. Reducing the readout bit-depth boosts the readout speed but puts a limit on the amount of DR that can be retained. That said, many modern cameras increasingly oversample for their core video modes, an act that helps reduce noise and boost DR.

Little information is given about most 'Raw' video formats, but if they are encoded in a linear manner, as delivered by cameras' ADCs, it's worth pointing out that a 10-bit logarithmic file can comfortably retain all the meaningful content of a 12-bit linear one.

It's more that there's a well-established alternative to Raw capture, rather than any weakness of the Raw footage, that leads us to stress that the benefits are more modest than you might expect, if you're coming from a stills-shooting background.

So what benefits do you gain?

The easiest benefit to spot is that, as in Raw photos, Raw video typically doesn't apply multipliers to its color channels and 'bake' a white balance into the file. This retains maximum flexibility in the edit, as it eliminates the risk that a badly judged white balance has prematurely clipped a channel that you then want to recover.

In practice, there isn't going to be a big difference between this and a 10-bit Log workflow, if you get the white balance quite close at the point of capture.

Raw footage should let you adjust the white balance and brightness rendering of the footage, after the fact. In this instance the interface gives you "ISO", "Exposure Offset" and "Color Temperature" tools. There's no setting for adjusting the Magenta/Green 'tint' axis.

Screengrab: DPReview from Final Cut Pro 11.1

Another benefit of the better Raw implementations is the ability to change ISO after the fact. Strictly speaking, you can't edit ISO after the fact any more than you can adjust "exposure" in a stills Raw converter, but you can see why they might choose to label the control that way.

Typically what's actually happening is that your camera is shooting at its base amplification setting (or its second gain step) to prevent unnecessary clipping, then brightening the footage in post, based on the "ISO" value to assign in your editor. As with white balance, this lets you second-guess your decisions at the point of shooting, but the end results are unlikely to be radically different to having shot Log in the 'correct' ISO, at the time.

What you definitely gain is much greater control over the sharpening and noise reduction being applied to your footage. Even at their minimal settings (and different brands have a very different idea of what minimal processing looks like), most hybrid cameras will apply quite a lot of noise reduction and sharpening to their processed output.

Shooting Raw gives you much more choice about the level and complexity of noise reduction and sharpening being applied. Of course, this also means you need to come up with a sharpening and noise reduction strategy in your workflow.

Support for Raw video has been improving in recent months, with Adobe adding beta support for Nikon's NRaw and related R3D formats. Between plugins from the manufacturers and third-party options such as Color Finale Transcoder 2, you can use most Raw formats in the most popular editing software.

This is particularly useful as, for instance, Nikon cameras derive their native Raw and their ProRes Raw output on different sensor modes, so the quality and available framerates can differ between them.

Another consideration is that a great many modern lens designs only deliver the combination of angle-of-view, size and price they offer, because they use software corrections as part of their design. Not all Raw video workflows maintain the necessary correction parameters, meaning you'll need to find correction plugins to mimic them, if you want to use many modern hybrid lenses.

The Nikon ZR lets you choose between capturing Nikon's N-Raw or the related R3D NE format. Alternatively you can capture the more widely supported ProRes Raw format, though not at the higher frame rates offered in its native formats.

Screengrab: Mitchell Clark

This isn't an issue if you're adapting manual focus lenses, but it's worth testing whether the Raw format you hope to use will maintain the lens correction information if you're planning to use most systems' native AF lenses. For instance, Nikon writes its lens corrections parameters to its NRaw and R3D Raw formats, but doesn't embed them in ProRes Raw mode.

Canon's lens corrections are provided as part of its Raw files. Premiere honors the lens settings, whereas DaVinci Resolve lets you hack around them, if you prefer. And, although correction support has been added to ProRes Raw, Panasonic's cameras don't yet add the metadata to present its lenses correctly.

Raw video tends to be larger than processed footage, not just because of increased bit-depth but also because chroma sub-sampling and sophisticated compression tends to be used on processed files. However, another factor is that truely Raw files are typically created from the sensor's native resolution. Sub-sampling the sensor by line-skipping would reduce the quality of the footage and rendering it then downscaling wouldn't be very raw. Some cameras let you crop in to a 4K region of the sensor but this effectively reduces the sensor size of your camera, lowering the quality of the footage.

This means you typically end up with roughly 6K or 7K footage with modern hybrid cameras. Differences in file size then add up very quickly. Here we've put together some typical bitrates and then extrapolated from that to work out roughly how much footage you can fit on a 256Gb memory card.

If you want the additional resolution, many recent cameras can also record processed, compressed 10-bit footage at their native capture resolutions (around 6 to 7K), which is typically captured at similar bit-rates to the 4K footage, though often with 4:2:0 chroma sub-sampling.

But, as the table above should make clear, you can expect to get less than a third as much Raw footage on your memory card. Or, to put it the other way 'round: you'll need to buy at least three times as much media and storage in order to capture a project in Raw.

Overall then, is it worth it? Ultimately that's up to you, what you shoot and whether you want to maintain some flexibilty / pass extra work to the editing stage of your workflow.

Increasingly the tools are becoming available to let you work with Raw footage, but it's definitely worth considering whether the additional workflow steps and added storage requirements are worth it for the marginal gains in post-processing flexibility.

As things stand, we don't believe Raw video should be a deciding factor when choosing a camera unless you're absolutely certain that it's essential for the work you plan to do.

It's become increasingly common for cameras to be able to capture Raw video without the need for an external recorder, making it that bit more accessible.

Photo: Mitchell Clark

Raw video looks set to become increasingly common on cameras, with cameras from Panasonic, Canon and Nikon all offering internal Raw capture options. We thought it was a good time to take another look at the pros and cons of Raw video, whether it's worth the effort and whether you should consider it an essential feature, next time you buy a camera.

The first point worth reiterating is that the benefits of Raw shooting aren't anywhere near as significant as they are for stills shooting. The main reason for this is that the alternative to shooting Raw stills is typically an 8-bit JPEG with a high-contrast S-curve applied to it, ready for viewing which leaves relatively little scope for significant brightness and tonal edits. Whereas the alternative to Raw in video tends to be 10-bit footage encoded with a Log response curve which is specifically designed to maintain tonal flexibility.

It also tends to be the case that most video is derived from 12-bit sensor readout, rather than the 14-bit modes used on most large pixel cameras. Reducing the readout bit-depth boosts the readout speed but puts a limit on the amount of DR that can be retained. That said, many modern cameras increasingly oversample for their core video modes, an act that helps reduce noise and boost DR.

Little information is given about most 'Raw' video formats, but if they are encoded in a linear manner, as delivered by cameras' ADCs, it's worth pointing out that a 10-bit logarithmic file can comfortably retain all the meaningful content of a 12-bit linear one.

It's more that there's a well-established alternative to Raw capture, rather than any weakness of the Raw footage, that leads us to stress that the benefits are more modest than you might expect, if you're coming from a stills-shooting background.

So what benefits do you gain?

The easiest benefit to spot is that, as in Raw photos, Raw video typically doesn't apply multipliers to its color channels and 'bake' a white balance into the file. This retains maximum flexibility in the edit, as it eliminates the risk that a badly judged white balance has prematurely clipped a channel that you then want to recover.

In practice, there isn't going to be a big difference between this and a 10-bit Log workflow, if you get the white balance quite close at the point of capture.

Raw footage should let you adjust the white balance and brightness rendering of the footage, after the fact. In this instance the interface gives you "ISO", "Exposure Offset" and "Color Temperature" tools. There's no setting for adjusting the Magenta/Green 'tint' axis.

Screengrab: DPReview from Final Cut Pro 11.1

Another benefit of the better Raw implementations is the ability to change ISO after the fact. Strictly speaking, you can't edit ISO after the fact any more than you can adjust "exposure" in a stills Raw converter, but you can see why they might choose to label the control that way.

Typically what's actually happening is that your camera is shooting at its base amplification setting (or its second gain step) to prevent unnecessary clipping, then brightening the footage in post, based on the "ISO" value to assign in your editor. As with white balance, this lets you second-guess your decisions at the point of shooting, but the end results are unlikely to be radically different to having shot Log in the 'correct' ISO, at the time.

What you definitely gain is much greater control over the sharpening and noise reduction being applied to your footage. Even at their minimal settings (and different brands have a very different idea of what minimal processing looks like), most hybrid cameras will apply quite a lot of noise reduction and sharpening to their processed output.

Shooting Raw gives you much more choice about the level and complexity of noise reduction and sharpening being applied. Of course, this also means you need to come up with a sharpening and noise reduction strategy in your workflow.

Support for Raw video has been improving in recent months, with Adobe adding beta support for Nikon's NRaw and related R3D formats. Between plugins from the manufacturers and third-party options such as Color Finale Transcoder 2, you can use most Raw formats in the most popular editing software.

This is particularly useful as, for instance, Nikon cameras derive their native Raw and their ProRes Raw output on different sensor modes, so the quality and available framerates can differ between them.

Another consideration is that a great many modern lens designs only deliver the combination of angle-of-view, size and price they offer, because they use software corrections as part of their design. Not all Raw video workflows maintain the necessary correction parameters, meaning you'll need to find correction plugins to mimic them, if you want to use many modern hybrid lenses.

The Nikon ZR lets you choose between capturing Nikon's N-Raw or the related R3D NE format. Alternatively you can capture the more widely supported ProRes Raw format, though not at the higher frame rates offered in its native formats.

Screengrab: Mitchell Clark

This isn't an issue if you're adapting manual focus lenses, but it's worth testing whether the Raw format you hope to use will maintain the lens correction information if you're planning to use most systems' native AF lenses. For instance, Nikon writes its lens corrections parameters to its NRaw and R3D Raw formats, but doesn't embed them in ProRes Raw mode.

Canon's lens corrections are provided as part of its Raw files. Premiere honors the lens settings, whereas DaVinci Resolve lets you hack around them, if you prefer. And, although correction support has been added to ProRes Raw, Panasonic's cameras don't yet add the metadata to present its lenses correctly.

Raw video tends to be larger than processed footage, not just because of increased bit-depth but also because chroma sub-sampling and sophisticated compression tends to be used on processed files. However, another factor is that truely Raw files are typically created from the sensor's native resolution. Sub-sampling the sensor by line-skipping would reduce the quality of the footage and rendering it then downscaling wouldn't be very raw. Some cameras let you crop in to a 4K region of the sensor but this effectively reduces the sensor size of your camera, lowering the quality of the footage.

This means you typically end up with roughly 6K or 7K footage with modern hybrid cameras. Differences in file size then add up very quickly. Here we've put together some typical bitrates and then extrapolated from that to work out roughly how much footage you can fit on a 256Gb memory card.

If you want the additional resolution, many recent cameras can also record processed, compressed 10-bit footage at their native capture resolutions (around 6 to 7K), which is typically captured at similar bit-rates to the 4K footage, though often with 4:2:0 chroma sub-sampling.

But, as the table above should make clear, you can expect to get less than a third as much Raw footage on your memory card. Or, to put it the other way 'round: you'll need to buy at least three times as much media and storage in order to capture a project in Raw.

Overall then, is it worth it? Ultimately that's up to you, what you shoot and whether you want to maintain some flexibilty / pass extra work to the editing stage of your workflow.

Increasingly the tools are becoming available to let you work with Raw footage, but it's definitely worth considering whether the additional workflow steps and added storage requirements are worth it for the marginal gains in post-processing flexibility.

As things stand, we don't believe Raw video should be a deciding factor when choosing a camera unless you're absolutely certain that it's essential for the work you plan to do.

Players often get quite passionate about Strandberg guitars – they either really love the lightweight headless wonders or they're very vocal in their hatred. The innovative Swedes behind such polarizing creations have now joined forces with MIDI masters Jamstik for a powerful six-string beast named Chameleon.

Continue Reading

Category: Music, Consumer Tech, Technology

Tags: MIDI, Guitar

Capricorn Group has unveiled its second prototype of the 01 Zagato hypercar at the Salon Rétromobile in Paris. The presentation came packed with all the right buzzwords to appeal to enthusiasts.

Continue Reading

Category: Automotive, Transport

Tags: Hypercar, Car, retromobile

The future of acne treatment might look a whole lot different than the range of oral and topical medications currently on pharmacy shelves.

Continue Reading

Category: Body and Mind

Tags: Skin, Antibacterial, Microneedles

CIPA's latest data, expertly visualized by one of our forum members, doesn't shine any light onto how any particular camera model is doing, but it does show that cameras with built-in lenses are on the rise.

Image: Richard Butler

The Camera and Imaging Products Association (CIPA) has released its annual figures on camera and lens shipments for 2025, and the statistics paint an interesting picture about the state of the camera industry. As a whole, it's back to growth, but one category of cameras is making far larger strides than the others. DPReview forum user Funtaril has put together a collection of visualizations based the data, which help illustrate those changes.

Before we take a look, there are some important things to note about where the CIPA data comes from. It's an industry group that gets statistics from member companies, including all of the major camera companies currently producing cameras for the market, and most of the major lens manufacturers. However, according to the most recent data available on CIPA's site, companies such as JK Imaging (which sells the Kodak-branded Easyshare cameras that frequently top Amazon's sales charts), Viltrox, 7artisans, Laowa and a host of other popular Chinese lens producers don't participate. That means the statistics offer a useful, but not comprehensive view of the market as a whole.

With that said, perhaps the most interesting datapoint is that 2025 saw a 11% growth in digital camera shipment volumes compared to 2024, which itself was the first year to see the market expand, rather than contract, since 2020. While sales of mirrorless cameras showed moderate growth, shipments of cameras with built-in lenses grew by 30%, making them 25.8% of the total volume of shipments for 2025. Clearly, manufacturers have taken notice of compacts' increased popularity.

It's also worth reiterating that these percentages represent how many units were shipped, rather than their value. That means that, if there was a rush to buy expensive fixed-lens cameras like the Sony RX1RIII or the Fujifilm GFX100RF, that's not skewing this particular data. And as noted before, that figure likely undersells how popular compacts have been, since it doesn't account for many of the models being sold at Costco, Amazon, or via TikTok Shop.

This is made all the more interesting by the scarce availability of the few compacts still on available on the market. It's hard not to wonder if the growth could have been even greater if cameras such as the Canon G7X Mark III were being produced in sufficient numbers to satisfy demand.

The Canon EOS Rebel T7, the last of the entry-level DSLRs, is almost unbelievably cheap at American retail giant Costco, going for $639 in a kit with two lenses, a backpack, and an SD card.

Photo: Jeff Keller

While it's exciting to see growth in the camera market, it's also clear that DSLRs are playing a smaller and smaller role in it. Funtaril's chart shows that shipments of them dropped 31% year over year in 2025, making it their sixth year in decline. As it stands, they only made up 7.3% of overall camera shipments last year.

According to CIPA's data, the 690,911 DSLRs shipped in 2025 were worth around ¥30.4 billion (∼$195 million). That means that each one was valued around $282, compared to the average value of a mirrorless camera at approximately $711. To be clear, these numbers represent the revenue manufacturers earn when selling the cameras to wholesalers, not the retail price the consumer ends up paying, but the difference is stark, suggesting that a lot of the remaining sales are the $639 Rebels being sold at Costco, rather than the latest $2000+ mirrorless cameras.

Image: funtaril

It's interesting to drill down to where exactly those DSLRs were going to. The CIPA numbers show that the vast majority are going to the Americas and Europe, where they accounted for 14.9% and 11.7% of the cameras shipped to those regions, respectively. By contrast, they made up only 1.2% and 1.5% of shipments for China and Japan, respectively (though the later is hardly representative of the market as a whole; 52.7% of its shipments were cameras with built-in lenses).

Despite 2025 seeing the release of the excellent Nikon Z5 II (and its existing low-cost rivals hitting ever lower prices on sale), shipments of full-frame and medium format cameras only increased by less than 2%, and made up a slightly smaller percentage of overall cameras shipped in 2025 than the year before. While 36.3% of the market is nothing to sneeze at, cameras with smaller sensors still made up the bulk of shipments at 63.7%.

The story is a little different when it comes to lenses. In 2025, Funtaril shows lenses for crop sensors making up 54.9% of shipments, with full-frame and larger lenses making up 45.1%. While crop lenses still make up the majority, the delta is much smaller. Again, this number is based on the absolute number of units, not the value, so the full-frame lenses' higher per-unit value doesn't affect this data.

One last interesting, but somewhat thorny, trend revealed by the data is regarding overall lens shipments from manufacturers that are part of CIPA. Funtaril calculated the attachment rate (how many lenses were being shipped for each interchangeable lens camera being shipped), and the number of full-frame and larger lenses shipped per camera has been dropping precipitously since the early 2020s (when CIPA started breaking out that data by sensor size).

It's hard to pin down exactly what that tells us for a variety of reasons; the lack of historical data means that it's always possible the numbers from 2020 and 2021 were artificially high due to people buying new lenses as they switched to mirrorless. It's also worth noting that owners of crop sensor cameras also purchase full-frame lenses, though the data doesn't tell us anything about the quantities in which they do so. These factors make it hard to tell how much of the drop in shipments is due to lack of interest, or the growing might of Chinese lens makers.

It's worth taking a look at Funtaril's full post on our forum, as there are over 30 charts and graphs to dig into, showing things like how regions' buying habits have been changing over time, and breakdowns of prime lens sales versus zoom lens sales. Funtaril also posted another thread late last year that looked at cameras' lifecycles, in an attempt to predict which cameras might get an update this year.

Check out the full thread

CIPA's latest data, expertly visualized by one of our forum members, doesn't shine any light onto how any particular camera model is doing, but it does show that cameras with built-in lenses are on the rise.

Image: Richard Butler

The Camera and Imaging Products Association (CIPA) has released its annual figures on camera and lens shipments for 2025, and the statistics paint an interesting picture about the state of the camera industry. As a whole, it's back to growth, but one category of cameras is making far larger strides than the others. DPReview forum user Funtaril has put together a collection of visualizations based the data, which help illustrate those changes.

Before we take a look, there are some important things to note about where the CIPA data comes from. It's an industry group that gets statistics from member companies, including all of the major camera companies currently producing cameras for the market, and most of the major lens manufacturers. However, according to the most recent data available on CIPA's site, companies such as JK Imaging (which sells the Kodak-branded Easyshare cameras that frequently top Amazon's sales charts), Viltrox, 7artisans, Laowa and a host of other popular Chinese lens producers don't participate. That means the statistics offer a useful, but not comprehensive view of the market as a whole.

With that said, perhaps the most interesting datapoint is that 2025 saw a 11% growth in digital camera shipment volumes compared to 2024, which itself was the first year to see the market expand, rather than contract, since 2020. While sales of mirrorless cameras showed moderate growth, shipments of cameras with built-in lenses grew by 30%, making them 25.8% of the total volume of shipments for 2025. Clearly, manufacturers have taken notice of compacts' increased popularity.

It's also worth reiterating that these percentages represent how many units were shipped, rather than their value. That means that, if there was a rush to buy expensive fixed-lens cameras like the Sony RX1RIII or the Fujifilm GFX100RF, that's not skewing this particular data. And as noted before, that figure likely undersells how popular compacts have been, since it doesn't account for many of the models being sold at Costco, Amazon, or via TikTok Shop.

This is made all the more interesting by the scarce availability of the few compacts still on available on the market. It's hard not to wonder if the growth could have been even greater if cameras such as the Canon G7X Mark III were being produceds in sufficient numbers to satisfy demand.

The Canon EOS Rebel T7, the last of the entry-level DSLRs, is almost unbelievably cheap at American retail giant Costco, going for $639 in a kit with two lenses, a backpack, and an SD card.

Photo: Jeff Keller

While it's exciting to see growth in the camera market, it's also clear that DSLRs are playing a smaller and smaller role in it. Funtaril's chart shows that shipments of them dropped 31% year over year in 2025, making it their sixth year in decline. As it stands, they only made up 7.3% of overall camera shipments last year.

According to CIPA's data, the 690,911 DSLRs shipped in 2025 were worth around ¥30.4 billion (∼$195 million). That means that each one was valued around $282, compared to the average value of a mirrorless camera at approximately $711. To be clear, these numbers represent the revenue manufacturers earn when selling the cameras to wholesalers, not the retail price the consumer ends up paying, but the difference is stark, suggesting that a lot of the remaining sales are the $639 Rebels being sold at Costco, rather than the latest $2000+ mirrorless cameras.

Image: funtaril

It's interesting to drill down to where exactly those DSLRs were going to. The CIPA numbers show that the vast majority are going to the Americas and Europe, where they accounted for 14.9% and 11.7% of the cameras shipped to those regions, respectively. By contrast, they made up only 1.2% and 1.5% of shipments for China and Japan, respectively (though the later is hardly representative of the market as a whole; 52.7% of its shipments were cameras with built-in lenses).

Despite 2025 seeing the release of the excellent Nikon Z5 II (and its existing low-cost rivals hitting ever lower prices on sale), shipments of full frame and medium format cameras only increased by less than 2%, and made up a slightly smaller percentage of overall cameras shipped in 2025 than the year before. While 36.3% of the market is nothing to sneeze at, cameras with smaller sensors still made up the bulk of shipments at 63.7%.

The story is a little different when it comes to lenses. In 2025, Funtaril shows lenses for crop sensors making up 54.9% of shipments, with full frame and larger lenses making up 45.1%. While crop lenses still make up the majority, the delta is much smaller. Again, this number is based on the absolute number of units, not the value, so the full frame lenses' higher per-unit value doesn't affect this data.

One last interesting, but somewhat thorny, trend revealed by the data is regarding overall lens shipments from manufacturers that are part of CIPA. Funtaril calculated the attachment rate (how many lenses were being shipped for each interchangeable lens camera being shipped), and the number of full frame and larger lenses shipped per camera has been dropping precipitously since the early 2020s (when CIPA started breaking out that data by sensor size).

It's hard to pin down exactly what that tells us for a variety of reasons; the lack of historical data means that it's always possible the numbers from 2020 and 2021 were artificially high due to people buying new lenses as they switched to mirrorless. It's also worth noting that owners of crop sensor cameras also purchase full frame lenses, though the data doesn't tell us anything about the quantities in which they do so. These factors make it hard to tell how much of the drop in shipments is due to lack of interest, or the growing might of Chinese lens makers.

It's worth taking a look at Funtaril's full post on our forum, as there are over 30 charts and graphs to dig into, showing things like how regions' buying habits have been changing over time, and breakdowns of prime lens sales versus zoom lens sales. Funtaril also posted another thread late last year that looked at cameras' lifecycles, in an attempt to predict which cameras might get an update this year.

Check out the full thread

A clever innovator that seems determined to topple the Leatherman/Victorinox-peaked multitool hierarchy, Roxon has slowly grown out a large lineup of modular "multi-multitools" – traditional-looking multitools that can quickly adapt to changing needs with swappable blades and implements. Its new Flex Titan promises to turbo-boost the all-around versatility of the iconic multi-plier format by drawing from two separate modular ecosystems.

Continue Reading

Category: Outdoors

Tags: roxon, Multitools, Modular, Tools

Dragon Tiny Homes has refreshed its affordable Sora tiny house, adding extra space and a more usable layout without pushing it out of budget territory. This new iteration offers a roomier interior that should be comfortable for two people to embrace full-time small living.

Continue Reading

Category: Tiny Houses, Outdoors

Tags: Building and Construction, Tiny Footprint, Micro-House, House, Home

I can’t remember the last time I bought a piece of gadget with my hard-earned money and liked it so much that I decided to review it one year after it initially came out. It just goes to show that not all things affordable have a short life span.

Continue Reading

Category: Electronics, Consumer Tech, Technology

Tags: DJI Innovations, Microphone, Actioncam, Audio, Video Recorders, GoPro, Reviews

The Mercedes-Benz Unimog always makes an impression. That becomes even truer when the stout-jawed U418 variant shows up painted in Rover green carrying what appears to be a truck-sized beer barrel or treasure chest below a rooftop tent. But what this wondrous creation actually is is a woody "micro-expedition vehicle" with pop-up roof and smart, fully connected living space meant to climb, crawl and wade through Mother Earth's most treacherous before burrowing down for a night or more.

Continue Reading

Category: Expedition Trucks, Adventure Vehicles, Outdoors

Tags: Unimog, expedition vehicles, RV, Motorhomes, Off-road, Off-grid, cmt-2026, Camping, Outdoors and Camping

Godox has announced the V1mid, a round-head on-camera flash unit. The company's latest flash sits in the V1 lineup and aims to provide a relatively affordable option for photographers who need more than a strictly budget-level flash but in a compact package.

Godox hasn't published any information on the V1mid's guide number or power, so those specs are unclear at this point. The company does specify a 1.7-second recycle time, which is just slightly lower than the V1's 1.5-second recycle time. It also promises up to 650 full-power flashes on a single charge, which is more than both of the other V1 flash units.

The Godox V1mid is smaller than the V1 and V1Pro, making it a more compact and lighter option for photographers on the go. It weighs 413g (14.6oz), compared to the V1's 530g (18.7oz) weight. To accommodate the smaller size, Godox did away with most of the buttons and dials found on the V1 and V1Pro, with the V1mid instead relying on a two-inch touchscreen and dial.

The V1mid supports TTL, manual and multi-modes. It is also compatible with high-speed sync up to 1/8000 sec, or 1/80000 sec with Sony cameras with global shutters. The flash also supports first- and rear-curtain sync. Flash power is adjustable from 1/256 to full power. It can function as both a sender and receiver using Godox's 2.4 GHz 'X' wireless radio system, making it possible to use in multi-flash setups. It also supports wired sync via a 2.5mm sync port.

Like the existing V1 models, some features of the V1mid are camera-dependent. For example, only certain versions offer a 2W LED modeling lamp. Additionally, the Canon version supports camera menu control. All versions are compatible with the Godox AK-R1 round-head magnetic accessory system, making it easier to modify the light.

The Godox V1mid is available for purchase today for $179 in versions for Canon, Fujifilm, Nikon, Olympus/Panasonic and Sony.

Godox has announced the V1mid, a round-head on-camera flash unit. The company's latest flash sits in the V1 lineup and aims to provide a relatively affordable option for photographers who need more than a strictly budget-level flash but in a compact package.

The Godox V1mid is smaller than the V1 and V1Pro, making it a more compact and lighter option for photographers on the go. It weighs 413g (14.6oz), compared to the V1's 530g (18.7oz) weight. To accommodate the smaller size, Godox did away with most of the buttons and dials found on the V1 and V1Pro, with the V1mid instead relying on a two-inch touchscreen and dial.

Despite the compact size, there are plenty of useful features on the V1mid that make it suitable for demanding situations like weddings and events. Godox promises even and powerful output, though it doesn't provide an actual power specification. It offers a 1.7-second recycle time, which is just slightly lower than the V1's 1.5-second recycle time. Godox also promises up to 650 full-power flashes on a single charge, which is more than both of the other V1 flash units.

The V1mid supports TTL, manual and multi-modes. It is also compatible with high-speed sync up to 1/8000 sec, or 1/80000 sec with Sony cameras with global shutters. The flash also supports first- and rear-curtain sync. Flash power is adjustable from 1/256 to full power. It can function as both a sender and receiver using Godox's 2.4 GHz 'X' wireless radio system, making it possible to use in multi-flash setups. It also supports wired sync via a 2.5mm sync port.

Like the existing V1 models, some features of the V1mid are camera-dependent. For example, only certain versions offer a 2W LED modeling lamp. Additionally, the Canon version supports camera menu control. All versions are compatible with the Godox AK-R1 round-head magnetic accessory system, making it easier to modify the light.

The Godox V1mid is available for purchase today for $179 in versions for Canon, Fujifilm, Nikon, Olympus/Panasonic and Sony.

What has opposable thumbs and is the most dexterous tool on the planet? The human hand, obviously. Well … not anymore. At least according to engineers at École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne’s (EPFL) school of engineering, who have developed a robotic hand capable of outperforming human dexterity in controlled manipulation tasks.

Continue Reading

Category: Robotics, Technology

Tags: EPFL, Hand

Nowadays, the internet is often abuzz with discussions about open gate video recording, especially when a new camera adds (or fails to add) it as a feature. But for the uninitiated, it can be hard to tell why people care enough about it to leave endless "no open gate, no buy" comments, and there's even a risk of overemphasising its usefulness in all the excitement.

In case you've missed it, open gate is a recording mode that captures the entire area of a sensor. In hybrid stills/video cameras, that typically means producing a 3:2 or 4:3 image, rather than a 16:9 or 17:9 one, like most people will be used to. This often, but not always, also results in a much higher-resolution file; some cameras that don't offer >4K modes for the more standard aspect ratios will give you access to the sensor's full resolution in open gate mode.

The feature has been gaining popularity in consumer-focused cameras since Panasonic added it to the GH5 via a firmware update. Its inclusion has seemingly corresponded with sensors getting faster readout speeds: since the camera has to read out more of its sensor's height than when it's recording 16:9, the sensor has to be fast enough to read out its entire area in 1/24, 1/30 or 1/60th of a second to deliver video.

The feature came to hybrid mirrorless cameras as a way to give videographers a better experience when shooting with anamorphic lenses that have a high squeeze factor. By capturing a taller image, then squishing it down, you can get a stronger "look" (ovular bokeh and interesting compression when focus racking) without having a toothpick-thin aspect ratio like you'd get if you'd originally shot it in 16:9.

If that all sounds like Greek to you, don't worry too much; it can be complicated to shoot anamorphic lenses 'properly,' which is why doing so isn't particularly common. If that was all open gate shooting let you do, it would have likely remained an extremely niche feature. However, users – and manufacturers' marketing departments – quickly discovered that there are other reasons to capture the entire sensor.

Chief among them is that it gives you room to manipulate your footage without having to crop in beyond your native resolution. If you're shooting at 3:2 or 4:3 and delivering to 16:9, you have quite a bit of freedom to choose which part of the frame you want to take your crop from. You also have more leeway to reposition your subject in the frame, rotate the footage, or stabilize it in post, without losing too much resolution or substantially changing your original horizontal framing. The additional vertical space and, often, resolution, let you crop in further to simulate an additional, tighter focal length. You can also move the crop around, simulating a pan or tilt to add a sense of dynamism without the need for an actual camera operator.

This illustration from the S5II's product page shows one of the main selling points manufacturers push when talking about open gate.
Image: Panasonic

What may be driving increased interest in open gate shooting is the ability to take that reframing to the extreme, pulling two entirely different formats from a single shot. That extra vertical headroom makes it easier to take a vertical crop out of your video, letting you shoot one clip and then cut it for horizontal platforms like YouTube and vertical ones like TikTok or Instagram. As these platforms have gained popularity, so too has the desire to take video shot for other, more landscape-focused platforms, without having to do two separate takes.

While this is technically possible with 16:9 footage, it can be quite difficult to find a framing that works for both horizontal and vertical with such a narrow aspect ratio.

Of course, open gate footage isn't necessarily immune from this problem, either. When producing videos for our YouTube channel, we sometimes shoot in open gate when we plan on also uploading a cut to social, and we've found that it can be tricky to find a framing that will work for both. In the example above, the vertical crop shows off the interesting glass sculpture hung in the treetops, but any horizontal crop that includes the presenter will look either off-balance or just make it look like he's standing in a featureless forest.

Open gate footage also usually takes up more storage space, owing to its higher resolution, which is something to keep in mind. It may also be a bit harder to edit on lower-end hardware, depending on what you're trying to do with it.

Finally, there's the issue of framing. Unless you're delivering video in your sensor's aspect ratio, shooting in open gate means you'll have to crop in on your footage when editing, which is an extra step in the process, requiring you to decide what the best framing is on a shot-by-shot basis. If your camera has the ability to display framelines, you can try to make sure your framing is relatively consistent while shooting, but there may still be the temptation to endlessly fiddle in post, trying to get the perfect crop.

If you've reached this point in the article and have found yourself thinking something along the lines of "I can't ever imagine needing/wanting to do any of this," you're probably not alone. People have gotten along very well with cameras that only shoot 16:9 for years, and while there's definitely an element of "I can't go back now that I've tried it" to open gate, many of its benefits are decidedly niche.

Of course, if you fit into that niche, open gate can be a valuable tool. Personally, I find it most valuable as a way to give myself more leeway when I'm trying to record myself, or when I feel artistically called to deliver video in a more square aspect ratio.

The point is not to prescribe where on that spectrum you should fall, but to highlight the fact that open gate isn't a universally useful feature. There will be those for whom it's a nice-to-have, but not necessarily a reason to pick one camera over another, and others whose needs make it a must-have feature (and still others who won't ever use it, plus those who are mad their camera even shoots video at all).

Nowadays, the internet is often abuzz with discussions about open gate video recording, especially when a new camera adds (or fails to add) it as a feature. But for the uninitiated, it can be hard to tell why people care enough about it to leave endless "no open gate, no buy" comments, and there's even a risk of overemphasising its usefulness in all the excitement.

In case you've missed it, open gate is a recording mode that captures the entire area of a sensor. In hybrid stills/video cameras, that typically means producing a 3:2 or 4:3 image, rather than a 16:9 or 17:9 one, like most people will be used to. This often, but not always, also results in a much higher-resolution file; some cameras that don't offer >4K modes for the more standard aspect ratios will give you access to the sensor's full resolution in open gate mode.

The feature has been gaining popularity in consumer-focused cameras since Panasonic added it to the GH5 via a firmware update. Its inclusion has seemingly corresponded with sensors getting faster readout speeds: since the camera has to read out more of its sensor's height than when it's recording 16:9, the sensor has to be fast enough to read out its entire area in 1/24, 1/30 or 1/60th of a second to deliver video.

The feature came to hybrid mirrorless cameras as a way to give videographers a better experience when shooting with anamorphic lenses that have a high squeeze factor. By capturing a taller image, then squishing it down, you can get a stronger "look" (ovular bokeh and interesting compression when focus racking) without having a toothpick-thin aspect ratio like you'd get if you'd originally shot it in 16:9.

If that all sounds like Greek to you, don't worry too much; it can be complicated to shoot anamorphic lenses 'properly,' which is why doing so isn't particularly common. If that was all open gate shooting let you do, it would have likely remained an extremely niche feature. However, users – and manufacturers' marketing departments – quickly discovered that there are other reasons to capture the entire sensor.

Chief among them is that it gives you room to manipulate your footage without having to crop in beyond your native resolution. If you're shooting at 3:2 or 4:3 and delivering to 16:9, you have quite a bit of freedom to choose which part of the frame you want to take your crop from. You also have more leeway to reposition your subject in the frame, rotate the footage, or stabilize it in post, without losing too much resolution or substantially changing your original horizontal framing. The additional vertical space and, often, resolution, let you crop in further to simulate an additional, tighter focal length. You can also move the crop around, simulating a pan or tilt to add a sense of dynamism without the need for an actual camera operator.

This illustration from the S5II's product page shows one of the main selling points manufacturers push when talking about open gate.
Image: Panasonic

What may be driving increased interest in open gate shooting is the ability to take that reframing to the extreme, pulling two entirely different formats from a single shot. That extra vertical headroom makes it easier to take a vertical crop out of your video, letting you shoot one clip and then cut it for horizontal platforms like YouTube and vertical ones like TikTok or Instagram. As these platforms have gained popularity, so too has the desire to take video shot for other, more landscape-focused platforms, without having to do two separate takes.

While this is technically possible with 16:9 footage, it can be quite difficult to find a framing that works for both horizontal and vertical with such a narrow aspect ratio.

Of course, open gate footage isn't necessarily immune from this problem, either. When producing videos for our YouTube channel, we sometimes shoot in open gate when we plan on also uploading a cut to social, and we've found that it can be tricky to find a framing that will work for both. In the example below, the vertical crop shows off the interesting glass sculpture hung in the treetops, but any horizontal crop that includes the presenter will look either off-balance or just make it look like he's standing in a featureless forest.

Open gate footage also usually takes up more storage space, owing to its higher resolution, which is something to keep in mind. It may also be a bit harder to edit on lower-end hardware, depending on what you're trying to do with it.

Finally, there's the issue of framing. Unless you're delivering video in your sensor's aspect ratio, shooting in open gate means you'll have to crop in on your footage when editing, which is an extra step in the process, requiring you to decide what the best framing is on a shot-by-shot basis. If your camera has the ability to display framelines, you can try to make sure your framing is relatively consistent while shooting, but there may still be the temptation to endlessly fiddle in post, trying to get the perfect crop.

If you've reached this point in the article and have found yourself thinking something along the lines of "I can't ever imagine needing/wanting to do any of this," you're probably not alone. People have gotten along very well with cameras that only shoot 16:9 for years, and while there's definitely an element of "I can't go back now that I've tried it" to open gate, many of its benefits are decidedly niche.

Of course, if you fit into that niche, open gate can be a valuable tool. Personally, I find it most valuable as a way to give myself more leeway when I'm trying to record myself, or when I feel artistically called to deliver video in a more square aspect ratio.

The point is not to prescribe where on that spectrum you should fall, but to highlight the fact that open gate isn't a universally useful feature. There will be those for whom it's a nice-to-have, but not necessarily a reason to pick one camera over another, and others whose needs make it a must-have feature (and still others who won't ever use it, plus those who are mad their camera even shoots video at all).

Saudi Arabia rarely does things by halves, so it's no surprise that its latest high-profile theme park has already smashed multiple world records. The newly opened Six Flags Qiddiya City carves a vast tourist destination out of the desert and features the world's longest, fastest, and tallest roller coaster.

Continue Reading

Category: Architecture, Technology

Tags: World's Largest, World's Fastest, Saudi Arabia, Building and Construction

There are all kinds of critical infrastructure lying beneath the surface of our oceans – road and rail tunnels connecting land masses, pipelines for oil and gas, power cables connecting islands and countries, underwater research stations, and submerged dams and hydroelectric installations.

Continue Reading

Category: 3D Printing, Manufacturing, Technology

Tags: 3D Printing, Construction, Building and Construction, Underwater, Cornell University, DARPA